May 30, 2006

Speaking of PC ...

... "The director of the Center for Equal Opportunities and Opposition against racism (CEOOR), a governmental agency in Belgium, has told the press that the stigmatization or discrimination of majorities is not real discrimination.

These days the CEOOR is distributing 100,000 post cards with the message "Vuile Hetero" (in Dutch) or "Sale Hétéro" (in French), which in English translates to: "Dirty Heterosexual". In a press release, the center explains that this is a "provocative boomerang campaign" intended to demonstrate "the kind of insults homosexuals are frequently subjected to".

And provocative it proved to be. The campaign led Jan Van Gucht, a 54 year old man living near the Flemish city of Kortrijk, to go to the police and file a complaint against the CEOOR. He told newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws:

"I am a heterosexual man and I did not choose to. I was born this way, and I do not want to be insulted. This campaign will increase the lack of understanding between both groups. We are too far gone when a center against discrimination, which until now I respected, is starting these kind of 'jokes'."

But the CEOOR would have none of that! Director Jozef De Witte said

"I have a number of experts working for me who know what discrimination is. The stigmatization of a majority is not really part of that. Discrimination is something that by definition affects minorities."

Blogger Luc Van Braekel responds to this silliness: "If we take De Witte at his word, the South African apartheid regime did not really discriminate against the black majority."

He continues:

The sad reality is that De Witte is a follower of Herbert Marcuse, who has poisoned the youth with his idea of partisan tolerance: the enemies have to be forced into tolerance, but we ourselves are allowed to be intolerant against them. This is because there are "correct" opinions that are to be preferred, and "incorrect" opinions that have to be fought against with all means. According to Marcuse, a non-partisan tolerance would leave the established values intact, which would lead to repressive tolerance. Therefore, Marcuse only accepted a partisan tolerance which would have to be "intolerant toward the protagonists of the repressive status quo", or would promote "intolerance against movements from the Right, and toleration of movements from the Left".

We've seen this right here, locally. Right-leaning DE bloggers have been dubbed "anti-immigrant" and "Islamophobes" by some on the left side of the state blogosphere -- for posting about illegal immigration and the dangers of radical Islam. They're considered "incorrect" views. However, let, for example, the "incorrect" suggestion of anti-Semitism squeak through by the right against the left, and you might as well think the apocalypse is upon us based on the ferocity of the left's response. It fits the Marcusian premise perfectly.

There's no worse "crime" than to dub a leftist something using their own bag of tricks.

The systematic subordination of members of targeted racial groups who have relatively little social power in the United States (Blacks, Latino/as, Native Americans, and Asians), by the members of the agent racial group who have relatively more social power (Whites). The subordination is supported by the actions of individuals, cultural norms and values, and the institutional structures and practices of society.

Just don't ask how it isn't racism/discrimination if a white person is subjected to harassment, unfair conditions, etc. while working at a black-owned company, for example. Or where the majority of a company's employees is minority. Or where a school's majority population is ... minority. These don't matter, you see, even though in these examples clearly the minorities have the majority of social power and [would be] doing the subordinating.